<<Hi Beth! First off, I’m glad you took the time to bother with this tripe, every time I think about doing a blog about it I just can’t stop laughing. I think you made a lot of cogent points, especially since this was so short notice. Anyway, I wrote some comments as I was reading, and I thought you/other readers might find them useful. I’ll probably write a post eventually, but why not make them public now…Sorry it’s long ……………………………“Innocent life”–Does he even realize words have meanings? You can’t be “innocent” unless you also have the capacity to be conscious, unless we’re going to call rocks innocent now.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

It is obvious that Jasper never uses a dictionary. The very definition of innocent debunks his comment, see (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innocent) The word is used not only for human beings but also for animals. Recently, NJ is getting heat from pro animal activists who feel it is wrong to hunt "innocent" bears. A living thing does not need to have consciousness to be innocent. Innocence, if Jasper reads the definition, merely means "freedom from guilt."(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innocence) This can apply to anyone or anything.

<<Slavery comparisons, really? I’m surprised he didn’t also bring up the Holocaust. Is it that hard to understand there is a difference between denying people personhood because of racism (when other ppl who are essentially the same ie white people, are given PH) and being a NON-person (ie zef never have PH to begin with, and no other special class of zef is accorded PH because they’re superior)? This analogy falls flat every time which I’ve told him; I got no response. Also, even when abortion was illegal it never carried the charge of murder, and a fetus was not considered a person at any point.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

I brought up Slavery because that was what the original blogger wrote about in her quote. Jasper erroneously assumes that the unborn are not persons. No Biology, Embryology or Psychology text would claim such an idea. Not even laws explicitly state this! I have mentioned the Unborn's Victim act to Jasper on Twitter in response to his play on the word murder and to date no response. The only thing that falls flat is Jasper's ability to think critically. If he gets past his pro-choice filter and see facts as they are in an objective manner, he will come to realize the truth.

<<Funny how he wants to even argue for fetal personhood since he’s all about science and PH is a MORAL question which is essentially unanswerable. I brought this up to him. No response.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Personhood is not a moral question. This is an issue that concerns philosophy, psychology and religion.

<<“Men, women, and children born or unborn are equal” Um, no, where is this to be found? The Declaration of Independence doesn’t say so, nor the Constitution. If you wanted to be picky, nowhere in our original founding documents were anyone but born white land-owning men considered people. So we’re not equal to the unborn legally. How about developmentally? Nope. Morally? I thought this was supposed to be science based? Not to mention abortion was widely practiced during the drafting of our Constitution.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

The ignorance of Jasper is not surprising. Pro-abortion advocates often disregard our most cherished documents. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

The rest of his common further demonstrates his ignorance of legalese and history

<<Unfair to makes these rights exclusive to the born? See here he his purposely avoiding the fact that black slaves and women are not attached to anyone. They are not encroaching on anyone’s body. There is no reason to disallow them PH because of sexism and racism used for economic profit. Their PH doesn’t conflict or threaten the PH of anyone else. The unborn are inside a person who DOES have undeniable and unquestionable PH. You cannot have 2 equal beings, one inside the other. Someone always has veto power.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Reproduction is the only way in which new organisms come into this world. People do not just appear out of nowhere. People in order to be people must be conceived in nature. Jasper seems to think that the born person has more value than the unborn. This is not so. Both are persons, both are lifeforms who exist due to the natural function of life that brings forth life: reproduction. This is where the delusion becomes disturbing. There is no mother on Earth except one suffering of mental illness who avoids protecting her unborn child.

<<Also, his “biological design/preg is natural” argument falls flat every time because it employs the naturalistic fallacy ie. just because something is “natural” it doesn’t follow that it is also “good”. (also deals with the descriptive =/=normative, and the “is-ought” problem). I mentioned all of these things to him and got no response. Also, what is with the rape victim-blaming?>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Jasper misapplies the term "naturalistic fallacy." This fallacy describes an attempt to justify the good in something because it appears natural. By his thinking, attempts to link homosexuality to nature is a fallacy. Homosexuals claim that it is found in nature among other species, so therefore it is normal and good.

He misses the point that the biological design/pregnancy entails the final good in the act of reproduction. Reproduction is not assumed to be a good, it is a good in itself because of the final cause it brings that is necessary for life to exist.

<<This whole “sex is only for biological reproduction” is also probably the naturalistic fallacy. The whole point of societal advancement is that we can move past mere biology and nature to take control of our lives, destinies, and desires. And his precious biology also fails if you know anything about female anatomy. How does he explain the fact that the clitoris is the only organ in existence meant solely for pleasure? He doesn’t, besides relegating it to the trash bin by calling it “just a sensor.” Really what he is saying is that female sexuality needs to be controlled and if a filthy dirty slut gets pregnant she needs to suffer.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Again, he misapplies the naturalistic fallacy. Sex, pregnancy, nutrition, eating, breathing - these all are natural functions that lead to a final good: existence/life. There is nothing fallacious in reminding the blogger of this reality. Jasper is expounding on points I never addressed. I commented on a blog that made specific points on specific things. Hence, I commented using appropriate material related to the blog.

How we live our lives or how society defines living was not covered in the blog so I do not see why he feels the need to address it. The clitoris is not made for pleasure. The Clitoris is merely a sensor. Some might describe the sensations within it as pleasure, but this is not the function. Our definition of the sensation is not what is really going on scientifically speaking.

One can eat chocolate and feel "pleasure" once it hits the taste buds; however, the function of taste buds is to tell the brain what substance it is encountering in the mouth. It is not for "feeling the pleasure" of food. There are also those who find pleasure in pain. Is that what pain is for? No of course not. Those persons just define the experience and function of pain as pleasure. I for one like to call an Apple Apple and Orange Orange.

<<In the paragraph about Professor Seller and the requirements for PH, he willfully ignores the fact that there’s a difference between being CAPABLE of something and DOING it all the time. Fetuses are never capable of responsibility and moral judgements, we are but that doesn’t mean we have to BE moral/responsible 24/7.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Jasper also forgets that infants and children also are not capable of responsibility or moral judgement. We can also include those with mental illness. Are they persons? According to Jasper they are not. Perhaps if we were moral and responsible 24/7 we would not need abortion and other evil things to cover up "mistakes."

<<Then we have rape blaming of the highest order. I suggest we tell rapists not to rape. *headdesk* Does he even realize that men like him are what keep rape culture moving along smoothly? Of course, he’d probably deny its existence all together.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Jasper misinterprets the comments made regarding rape and the burglar analogy used. Again, he filters everything through the pro choice rhetoric rendering his rationality invalid.

<<Then we have our menstrual cycles–does he even know that that can be halted through a variety of measures, both temporarily and permanently? That medicine has in fact freed us from our cycles? Probably not since he is disgusted by BC.>>

<<Then we have the funny feminists “invented” bodily autonomy meme. Really? Hello, it’s in the 14 amendment/Due process clause, a derivative of privacy. This shit isn’t made up, nor did we invent it. The need for bodily integrity is also the foundation of bioethics and medical informed consent.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Bodily autonomy is not mentioned in the 14th Amendment. What country do you live in? I am in the United States buddy. :) You cannot add to the Constitution what is not there. That is intellectually dishonest.

<<If he wanted to understand our emphasis on Body Integrity he’d research any number of things I’ve told him about. The fight for BI doesn’t happen in a vacuum but rather is a reaction to a lack of it. He remains willfully ignorant about the loss of humanity of pregnant women through practices such as twilight sleep/”The Cruelty of Maternity Wards”, shackling pregnant women in labor, forced sterilization of Native and Black women–which Native women were suffering from until the SEVENTIES, forced/court ordered c sections, women being arrested for attempting home births/VBACs, women having hospitals legally remove custody of newborns when the mother tried to implement her right to informed consent of her medical care, the USAs eugenics program which sterilized “promiscuous” women, the era of “hysteria”/wandering womb, and the belief that Postpartum Depression is just craziness a la “The Yellow Wallpaper.”>>

Sacerdotus comments:

This comment is irrelevant to the original blog I commented on.

<<Pregnancy, whether wanted or unwanted makes many women 2nd class citizens, which is exacerbated by class and race, as I’m sure you can imagine. He says that zef and woman are “equal” and precedence is never given to the fetus, yet that is actually impossible, and it’s not how these beliefs play out in real life. If the zef isn’t taking priority, how do you explain fetal PH/heartbeat laws, sonogram laws even when the pregnancy is because of rape (and early sonograms must be performed vaginally), arbitrary and burdensome counseling/wating period laws, shutting done PPs all over the country which provide WOMEN with healthcare?>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Pregnancy does not make any woman a second class citizen. It makes her into a powerful citizen. A citizen who maintains the population of a nation! I do not see pregnancy as a weakness, but a strength. If women all over the globe refuse to have sex and bear children, what will happen? It will be the end of the species. Ironically, wives withhold sex in order to keep their husbands in check. :)

Jasper's idea of feminism degrades woman. It makes a woman a slave to a rhetoric that is against science and human life. It forces her to make decisions based on the idea that she is weak.

<<Frankly it’s laughable that he rails against the very concept of BI without even being educated as to WHY women are pissed off about their bodies being dominated by intrusive laws and practices.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Not all women share this strange idea of "BI." This idea stems from the radical feminist ideology which brainwashes women into thinking they are victims of man. It puts woman against man, woman against child, woman against the family, woman against reason and faith, and woman against herself.

<<Is he aware of WHY medicine was taken from the hands of female healers and given to men? Ever heard of the women’s holocaust/the Burning Times? It was quite simple really, call them all witches and then exterminate them. Ever heard of The Witches Hammer, an instruction manual for rounding up witches by the church? It was quite lucrative for the Church actually, as they got all the woman’s property to pay for her trial and execution. And what exactly were these women guilty of? Giving out contraception, being sexually liberated, and performing abortions.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Again, this is irrelevant to the original blog. Jasper is going on a rant.

<<How about why abortion was criminalized in the first place? Sacerdotus would probably have us believe that it was because society was so much more moral back then, and they knew the fetus was a person and abortionists were evil murderers. Nope, one of the biggest reasons was because midwives, against the odds, were coming back. They were the male doctors biggest source of competition so their practice was outlawed.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

This is not true. Abortion has always been seen as immoral in many cultures. Catholicism which basically built the west as we know it has always spoken out against this crime against humanity. We are talking about a human life here, not a procedure.

Would you punch a pregnant woman in the stomach? Would you let a pregnant woman stand in a bus or subway train or offer her a seat? A normal person would never punch a pregnant woman because he/she knows the woman has a child within and it is immoral to hurt that child or the woman. Moreover, a normal and polite person would offer a seat to a pregnant woman on a bus or train. Why? Because she is carrying 2 bodies!

Abortion is the intentional killing of a human life in the womb. No matter how pro choice tries to sugar coat this, the reality stands. Hitler said that if one takes a lie and repeats it over and over people will believe it, well abortion is that lie today.

<<The point is, this stuff has a history. Things are the way the are, good or bad, for a REASON. Women’s anger and angst surrounding their bodies doesn’t happen in a vacuum, nor did it occur out of the blue. Most of this history is lost on many people today, but it is the prologue to the unjust practices and preg/abortion debates raging today.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

Regardless of the history, evil will always be evil. We cannot allow this injustice to continue.

<<If he can look at history flowing into the present day, and how pregnant women and women who want to terminate are STILL treated, even how midwives are still stigmatized, and not see a connection or how this entire prioritization of the zef harms women, than he’s a lost cause. This is why he will always lose this debate, because he fails to take into consideration the sociological and historical context of both pregnancy and abortion. It will never center solely on science, even thogh it would be convenient for him if it did, because women aren’t fighting to regain equality while pregnant, we’re still fighting to gain it in the first place.>>

Sacerdotus comments:

The only debate is life vs death. Abortion is the intentional killing of an unborn child. You are desensitized to this, which is scary. Your idea puts the mother against the child. The child is seen as a problem or disease. You preach tokophobia, while I preach the beauty of motherhood and human life. No human life is dispensable, born or unborn.

I understand very well the sociological and historical context of both pregnancy and abortion, that is why I speak out. Death is not a solution to anything. If you are Pro Abortion then you cannot speak out against the death penalty, it would be hypocrisy.

Welcome

All posts and original content are copyright Sacerdotus.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher/author, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, contact author.

If permission is given, provide credit to the author, do not alter the content and backlink to the original post.

Named in Top 100 Catholic Blogs

Named in Top 30 Atheist Blogs

​

Named in Top 100 Philosophy Blogs

Translate This Page Into Many Languages

Fundraising - Please donate

Support the Ministry

Comments

Thank you for reading and for your comment. Please be patient if you posted a comment. Spammers and other people who hide under "anonymous" sometimes post vulgar or nonsensical comments that I cannot post for obvious reasons. If your comment pertains to the posting and is free of ad hominem and vulgarity, rest assured it will be posted.